GUILTY AZ - Shanesha Taylor leaves kids in car during interview, Scottsdale, 2014

[Hoosgirl]

She says it's "simple math" why she isn't funding the $60k trust and she "absolutely refused" to do $90k like the court wanted, according to her legal fundraiser linked through her twitter. I look forward to the results of her next court date.

 

[K_Z]

I think she's probably right about the situation being "simple math". As in, a subtraction problem with an answer of zero. JMO.

So, where is the money? Tied into a housing down payment, or security deposit and rent? We know a chunk went to housing, as that was revealed in early media articles. Given over to attorney fees? Set aside to pay taxes on it next year, lol? Spent already on bail and living expenses, like gas, food, car insurance, and utilities? I'm looking forward to hearing what the explanation is in court. That was a lot of money to blow in just a few months, for someone who isn't used to having that kind of money available. Was Shanesha responsible with managing it, or not?

If she hasn't funded the account by Oct 27, and whatever the reason is for that is unsatisfactory to the judge, I think there is a possibility of re-arrest and reinstatement of charges. If the judge and prosecutor think she is playing around with the plea deal, she may find herself in jail again, and her kids back under DCS supervision. Is she REALLY going to risk that?

This woman has been given break after break. The plea deal was an incredibly generous gift that other negligent mothers in the same position seldom get. The windfall of $114K cash that promised to turn her life around hasn't seemed to help very much. It's just so hard to muster sympathy for this woman.

IDK, maybe her kids would be better off supervised by DCS and in foster care, or with relatives, while she decides how to satisfy her obligations, and put a decent life together? I just can't believe she couldn't find ANY source of employment. I understand that sometimes people can't find a job in the industry they want, but what else has she tried? How aggressive has her search been? What resources has she used to coach her?

 

[Writerofwrongs]

This story is truly shocking!! I am flabbergasted that $90,000 has been raised for the defence of this woman - as others have rightfully pointed out ....had those little ones died she would of been vilified for her actions -job prospect or not.
I can maybe understand people having a miniscule amount of sympathy ....being an working single parent with no support network is hard BUT no way should her poor judgment and irresponsible actions be celebrated or excused.

The money should be put in trust for the kids....the "victims" in this case. They ware the ones who should have the people's concern and sympathy. This could have very easily had a tragic ending.

 

[Oblio]

Is it possible that she bought a house outright before that mandate was made? If this is what happened, then well, I'd have no problem with it whatsoever. 16 years of stable shelter will have mean more to their lives than a pay out on their eighteenth birthday. And if that is the case, she should be on the hook to repay into a trust fund to complete X amount(whatever 60k would be matured) by a certain date (when her first child would get the pay out) and any amount short of that would be obtained by selling the house or transferring it to her children.

 

[al66pine]

....So, where is the money? Tied into a housing down payment, or security deposit and rent? We know a chunk went to housing.... Given over to attorney fees? Set aside to pay taxes on it next year, lol? Spent already on bail and living expenses, like gas, food, car insurance, and utilities? ....

sbm bbm

Many ppl contributed ~ $114,000 thru an internet go-f**d-me.com-type site to be transferred to Shanesa, IIRC.

Q1. Is payment a personreceives from a go-f**d-me-type entity subject to federal income tax?
Appears to be non-taxable to recipient, generally.
"Gifts and inheritances. In most cases, property you receive as a gift, bequest, or inheritance is not included in your income." bbm
from IRS Publication 525, www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p525.pdf page 31, re personal income tax.

From FAQs of a not-to-be-named-here funding site:
"What about taxes and stuff? "Unfortunately, we're unable to provide specific tax advice since everyone's situation is different. While this is no means a guarantee, most donations on GoF**dMe are simply considered to be 'personal gifts' which are not taxed as income in the US. Additionally, only donations made to a legally registered non-profit or charity may be considered eligible for donors to claim as a tax deduction. Again, every situation is different so please consult with a tax professional in your area."
^ http://www.gof**dme.com/questions?section=donations ^

BTW, if one person (instead of many people, like thru a funding site) makes a gift to someone ---
"Person receiving your gift or bequest. Generally, the person who receives your gift or bequest of property from your estate will not have to pay any federal gift tax or estate tax. Also, that person will not have to pay income tax on the value of the gift or inheritance received."
^ from http://www.irs.gov/uac/Publication-559,-Survivors,-Executors,-and-Administrators link to 'Publication 599 (HTML)"

In short, imo, Shanesa does not have to share this bounty w Uncle Sam.

O/T #1.
More info from above site's FAQs:
"How do I know it's safe to donate to someone?
"With hundreds of thousands of campaigns, it's not feasible for GoF**dMe to investigate the claims stated by each campaign organizer. Rather, we provide visitors with the tools to make an informed decision as to who they choose to support. While GoF**dMe and its payment partners do provide a number of safeguards to deter fraud, we must insist that visitors follow the advice stated on each and every campaign. "Only donate to people you personally know & trust." For more information, please visit: http://www.gof**dme.com/safety" bbm. *bm
The safety page focuses mostly on online & payment security issues, not on authenticating fundraisers or claims their intended uses of $.

* O/T #2.
More confusion possible about tax implications for others involved. May post more on this.

Jm2cts and I may be wrong. As the IRS ^cautions^ please visit with your tax professional.

 

[al66pine]

From her Twitter a/c:

"Shanesha Taylor‏@shaneshataylor2 Oct 18 If the facts don’t fit the theory, change the facts.-Albert Einstein"

Hmmm, meaning what, Ms Taylor?

 

[K_Z]

This story is truly shocking!! I am flabbergasted that $90,000 has been raised for the defence of this woman - as others have rightfully pointed out ....had those little ones died she would of been vilified for her actions -job prospect or not.
I can maybe understand people having a miniscule amount of sympathy ....being an working single parent with no support network is hard BUT no way should her poor judgment and irresponsible actions be celebrated or excused.

The money should be put in trust for the kids....the "victims" in this case. They ware the ones who should have the people's concern and sympathy. This could have very easily had a tragic ending.

BBM for focus. Regarding the "no support" comment-- ST had a LOT of support available to her at the time she left her kids in the car.

1. She is ex- military-- a Veteran, entitled to LOTS of different kinds and levels of benefits, job counseling, discounted home loans, health care if indigent or entitled by discharge criteria, etc. These resources and benefits are not a secret to her.

2. Her older child is from a different father (also military, IIRC) than the younger 2, who early articles stated was involved and paying child support, IIRC.

3. Her parents were essentially raising the older child, who lived with them, went to school, etc. before the birth of the 2 younger kids.

4. ST and her younger 2 children also lived with her parents (both at work) at the time that she left them in the car for the job interview.

5. The SUV she was driving daily originally belonged to her sister, who was incarcerated at the time ST left her kids in the car.

6. ST had a lively on-line presence on social media, and claimed to have many supportive friends, at the time she left the 2 very young children in the car. She also had posted lots of inspirational quotes and statements about being grateful for her family and friends, happy with her life, etc.

7. There was an open child protective services investigation that was started at the birth of her then 6 month old, due to the 6 month old testing positive for illegal substances at birth. So, social services/ CPS was already involved-- whether one considers that "support" or not is another issue. Social services certainly would have been a resource for a single mother looking for a job, who needed to find emergency child care to attend a job interview. That is, if she had asked for help.

Now, while I don't doubt that she had some issues finding child care that particular day, and some difficulties finding the kind of job she wanted to have, I also don't buy it for a minute that she was abandoned, alone, unsupported by family and friends as a single mother, and not knowing where to turn for help.

From where I'm sitting, it was a selfish and irresponsible decision of convenience that she made to leave the kids in the car, risking their life, and risking abduction. And JMO, but I highly doubt it was the first time. She wasn't even outwardly worried or panicked about the kids when she finally showed up, and police were there.

The question before the court now, is did ST do what the court directed her to do, and what she agreed to do, as part of her plea? And if not, she better have a massively good reason for not doing that, AND for not satisfying that with the court thru ordinary out-of-court channels. When something like this gets to the point that it's actually back in court in front of a judge, it usually means the defendant has been chronically uncooperative or evasive out of court, and this is the last "wake up call" before criminal charges are reinstated, IMO.

 

[newone]

wants to reduce the amount of the trust fund due to unemployment

http://www.azfamily.com/news/Judge-...eft-kids-in-car-to-fund-trusts-280555132.html

 

[newone]

she and the father of her young children are back together and he's unemployed too

the creator of the fund for her speaks out


"As for her saying she can't get a job because of the negative media, throughout the fundraiser I did receive job offers and forwarded them to her. I do not know if she followed up on them.

The accusations of her not being a single mother; Her and the father of her two youngest are back together. He does not work."


Read more: http://www.azfamily.com/news/Woman-...aylor-speaks-out-280602482.html#ixzz3HQXre2J9

 

[Hoosgirl]

Motion filed to reinstate charges, accounting of funds required:

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news...nesha-taylor-fails-fund-trusts-abrk/18007147/

 

[kimi_SFC]

Motion filed to reinstate charges, accounting of funds required:

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news...nesha-taylor-fails-fund-trusts-abrk/18007147/

K_Z called it!

:snip:

The Maricopa County Attorney's Office filed a motion late Monday to reinstate the prosecution of Shanesha Taylor, the job-seeking mother who left her two toddlers in a car during an interview in March, on charges of child abuse.

Prosecutors made the motion after Taylor failed to meet a deadline to deposit $60,000 in a trust fund for her children. Instead, Taylor asked the judge for a decrease in the total amount that she originally agreed to deposit.



Her request left the prosecutors wondering aloud what happened to the more than $114,700 she received in public donations after her March arrest, and a judge asked her to produce bank statements by a hearing on Wednesday.

------

Sense of entitlement, much? :cow: :moo:

:judge:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LietKynes]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-28...s-deadline-set-trust-fund-kids-donations.html

There is a book titled , "The Tragedy of American Compassion", by Marvin Olasky ; haven't read through it all, but he argues that "... compassion means tough love in which those who give must demand self-help from those who receive...."

Imagine the donors' reaction if those little ones had perished in the heat ! SMH

 

[tlcya]

Thanks for all the recent updates. Golly Gee willakers I am shocked that Ms. Taylor has failed to comply with the court's order that those funds be placed in trust toward the care and benefit of her children. (sarcasm alert)

$114,000 raised. Some likely did go for legal fees. But not a big chunk. So that leaves at least 90,000 to 100,000 that should still be remaining.

and yet this loving mother who only wants a job and to support her children cannot produce even so much as 60,000.

I make significantly less than 60K a year. And yet I live off of that. You mean to tell me this woman still can't find a job, and has somehow blown thru all that money that good hearted masses gave her? At least 40,000 spent in less than a year? On what? Not her kids, the state was paying for them.


Disgusting.

 

[al66pine]

"Defense attorney Benjamin Taylor, no relation, said his client has met most of the conditions but wants to put $35,000 into trust funds. He argued that the amount was justified since his client has paid for child care through April 2015 and is still looking for a job."
from Oct27 http://www.azcentral.com/story/news...nesha-taylor-fails-fund-trusts-abrk/18007147/

Does anyone know about her supposed pre-payment for child care thru Ap 2015?
Paid for what foster care expenses? Paid state of AZ? Paid day care center? Paid into a court controlled a/c? What? How much?
How is this handled in other cases?

 

[tlcya]

how exactly does one prepay for a half a year of childcare? I will believe that hooey when I see proof of it.

We assist people with creation of trusts at my office. secured trusts for minors and special needs trusts to benefit people who receive govt benefits (SSI, Medicaid, etc).

1) it is relatively simple process and does not take months and months to accomplish.
2) had those funds been placed in trust with a bank or reputable trustee childcare, school clothes, etc can all be paid from the fund.
3) there is no big delay between requesting funds from trustee for approved child related expenses. a day or two is my experience between request of funds and receipt of funds or instrument payable to appropriate provider.

So all this, we just haven't ironed out how to get the trust set up, or I went ahead and prepaid for childcare for the next half a year is ridiculous and does not stand up to scrutiny.

Why hand over a big hunk of money to "prepay" childcare when it is just as easy to request that a trustee cut a check every week or every month made payable to the childcare provider to cover those costs.

The only reason to claim to have prepaid one half year's worth of daycare that I can see is to avoid scrutiny of those costs by an objective trustee.

It is my opinion that Ms. Taylor blew through a substantial portion of the funds the court had insisted be put in trust ad this prepayment BS is simply her trying to explain away where that money went. Who did she pay? A friend, the children's father, who will be providing this prepaid for daycare?

If that mother has prepaid for half year of daycare for the two youngsters back in her care at some reputable accredited childcare facility it should be a simple matter of producing a canceled check or a receipt stating same.

But no all we get is more spin from her attorney.

Not buying it.

Assuming she did prepay for childcare thru April, why? What if one of the children dies or is removed from her care? Does she get a partial refund? What if the daycare center goes out of business, bankrupt? This is absolute baloney and I simply refuse to believe it unless a receipt is produced. Hence the court's request for an accounting.

 

[al66pine]

This addresses one thing I wondered about. The fundraiser had never met ST. If this thread discussed it earlier, I missed it.

"The woman who started the fund-raising page for "Shanesha Taylor" is now speaking out."Like everybody else, I saw the mug shot. It really touched me, as it has for people all over the world," said Amanda Bishop....
"All I saw were posts about her children, how much she loved her children, pictures of her children, so that kind of convinced me that I didn't think she was a bad mother," said Bishop in March.
The two women had never met and Bishop watched as the money poured in to the tune of more than $100,000." BBM SBM
Read more: http://www.azfamily.com/news/Woman-...aylor-speaks-out-280602482.html#ixzz3HSgoSHFQ Oct 28

Sad, sad, sad, that despite all the $$ given to her, ST is not stepping up to meet responsibilities.

 

[al66pine]

My comments below in red. Also bbm sbm

how exactly does one prepay for a half a year of childcare?....
Me too.

....Why hand over a big hunk of money to "prepay" childcare when it is just as easy to request that a trustee cut a check every week or every month made payable to the childcare provider to cover those costs.... Who did she pay? A friend, the children's father, who will be providing this prepaid for daycare?
Thinking alike here, w you.

If that mother has prepaid for half year of daycare for the two youngsters back in her care at some reputable accredited childcare facility it should be a simple matter of producing a canceled check or a receipt stating same.
Like letter from day care facility, stating $ amt paid & time paid for, names of children, etc, w notarized siggie and a fin. document showing $ amt and payee, like a cashiers ck, or ACH payment on ST's bank stmt, and as you said, D/C license. Also standard $ rate per child per day/wk/mo.

Assuming she did prepay for childcare thru April, why? What if one of the children dies or is removed from her care? Does she get a partial refund? What if the daycare center goes out of business, bankrupt?
Yes, why pre-pay that much?

This is absolute baloney and I simply refuse to believe it unless a receipt is produced. Hence the court's request for an accounting.
Amen.

"The judge asked if she would be willing to show the state her bank records so authorities can determine whether she has made big purchases and if it is necessary to renegotiate the agreement. Taylor told the judge that the money is in her mother's bank account and her mom may not want her to disclose the records.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-trust-fund-kids-donations.html#ixzz3HSstlHCQ Oct 28
Aye, there's the rub.
Oh, ST's mother can transfer ST's remaining $ to an a/c in ST's name, where it should have been since day one.
Clears it right up. No rub at all.

Is it poss about the only transactions on Mom's bank statements are cash withdrawals, mostly at ATMs? IDK.
Could that explain ST's reluctance to provide documentation of spending & remaining $?

Jm2cts and I may be wrong.

I hope those kids soon find better models in life than her influence.

 

[tlcya]

Why exactly is this money in her mother's account all this time? She was so busy she could not get around to opening an account in her or her and her children's names? just like she and her attorney have apparently been just too darn busy to set up those court required trusts for the children?

Busy busy lady it would seem. Doing what I am not sure because she still isn't working. I wish the court had asked her to provide some sort of record showing she had applied for any jobs since her arrest.

Sokay, pretty sure I know the answer to that already.

 

[K_Z]

So, there is supposed to be a hearing today to see again if ST has complied. I'm guessing there's going to be more empty excuses, with a "poor me" or two thrown in.

I agree strongly with everyone above that what the court is asking her to produce, bank statements, receipts, etc, is not onerous or unreasonable. As tlcya says, setting up those trusts should have been able to be completed in a day or so. She said in court, outright, that she doesn't want to do it! She wants to retain full control of whatever money still exits, while she languishes around unemployed and, IMO, probably not looking very hard for any kind of work to fund her lifestyle. And supporting her unemployed baby daddy, too?

There's a reason that whatever money still exists is in her MOTHER'S bank account. Sheltered from the court, IMO.

My opinion of this woman drops lower every time I read another article about her. I don't think she's merely stupid, anymore. All of this behavior is very intentional. She's playing a giant game of manipulation, and appears to be quite an expert at it, who has honed her skills over time, IMO. The prosecutor and judge know this. I think they're giving her enough rope to hang herself. My prediction is she is going to see the inside of a jail cell again before all this is over. I think she needs it, and deserves it. Hopefully, with no social media fundraiser this time.

Boy, she disgusts me in all kind of ways. I have dropped to just zero sympathy for her and her self created situation. Makes me wonder if the boys wouldn't be a lot better off being raised in foster care, or by other relatives. She seems to need some long term respite from her responsibilities for them, IMO. I hope she doesn't have any more children.

 

[Snoods]

Thanks for all the recent updates. Golly Gee willakers I am shocked that Ms. Taylor has failed to comply with the court's order that those funds be placed in trust toward the care and benefit of her children. (sarcasm alert)

$114,000 raised. Some likely did go for legal fees. But not a big chunk. So that leaves at least 90,000 to 100,000 that should still be remaining.

and yet this loving mother who only wants a job and to support her children cannot produce even so much as 60,000.

I make significantly less than 60K a year. And yet I live off of that. You mean to tell me this woman still can't find a job, and has somehow blown thru all that money that good hearted masses gave her? At least 40,000 spent in less than a year? On what? Not her kids, the state was paying for them.


Disgusting.

BBM Her attorney agreed to work pro bono.

Taylor’s lawyer, Benjamin P. Taylor II, is working pro bono (they are not related).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-children-in-car-during-job-interview-speaks/

Anyone else find it interesting that the unemployed father of her two youngest suddenly finds Shanesha irresistible and they are back together? :thinking:

Why would you prepay daycare for six months when you don't have a job? She sure is scrambling, isn't she?